Slashdot Mirror
Should Apple Let Competitors Use FaceTime? (cnet.com)
In 2010, Steve Jobs first introduced FaceTime and promised it would become an open industry standard that could be used by Apple's competitors -- not just Apple. Well, eight years later and that still hasn't happened. CNET's Sean Hollister provides a theory as to why that is: There's also an ongoing lawsuit to consider -- as Ars Technica documented in 2013, Apple was forced to majorly change how FaceTime works to avoid infringing on the patents of a company called VirnetX. Instead of letting phones communicate directly with each other, Apple added "relay servers" to help the phones connect. Presumably, someone would have to pay for those servers, and/or figure out a way for them to talk to Google or Microsoft or other third-party servers if FaceTime were going to be truly open. But that doesn't make a broken promise less frustrating. Particularly now that Apple could potentially fix annoying business video calls as well. A Skype-killing video chat service that worked on Mac, iOS *and* Windows, Android and the open web? That's something I bet companies would be happy to pay for, too.
VirnetX is the US intelligence communityâ(TM)s patent troll. The CIA/NSA sued Apple to keep them from offering encrypted, direct-to-client video chat between multiple people (the old iChat, far superior to FaceTime, let multiple people video chat on one call without routing through intermediate servers). Likewise Skype once used a decentralized network for routing calls, without any known hubs through which calls would be destined to pass, before Microsoft bought them. IChat was neutered into FaceTime and Skype was neutered by Microsoft in the same way and for the same reason: both started requiring calls to be routed through centralized hubs so the Feds could collect them easier for eavesdropping. Thatâ(TM)s why VirnetX sued Apple.
And I do not want any Facebook or Microsoft software on any of my devices.
#DeleteFacebook